I2P 開発会議 209

I2P dev meeting, November 20, 2012 @ 20:00 UTC

Quick recap

Russian User Support: Russians are the top country using I2P at
this time, followed by USA and Germany. We know of one dedicated
Russian user that is providing help in our IRC channel #ru
(also see next point). If we add to this area, that would be
great. Since most of the network is russian it makes sense to
make sure they get quality help so they are running their
router optimally.

Complementing the above issue would be to have our irc operators
redirect either #ru -> #i2p-ru or vice versa, there seems to be
conflicting advice given to russian users asking for directions
in this area:

The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 27 @ 19:30 UTC (7:30PM)

完全な IRC ログ

20:03:41 <Laughing1uddah> Meeting time?
20:03:48 <dg> It is!
20:04:01 <k0e> checkout http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgJ7yck1qwY
20:04:01 <iRelay> Title: Android ICS on Raspberry Pi, Views: 139170, Rating: 99.0%
20:04:05 * dg gulps20:04:15 <dg> okay then.. let's begin
20:04:22 <dg> our topics today are:
20:04:33 <dg> 0) Welcome
20:04:40 <dg> (0a) Changing things up
20:04:47 <dg> (Meetings, etc)
20:05:00 <dg> (1) Network health
20:05:03 <dg> (1a) IRC
20:05:10 <dg> (1b) Growth (how do we get i2p out there?)
20:05:13 <dg> (2) IRL events (CCC, Cryptoparties..)
20:05:20 <dg> (3) - Merging Fux improvements into trunk
20:05:23 <dg> (4) Website
20:05:26 <dg> (4a) - Mirroring..
20:05:33 <dg> (4b)- SSL
20:05:36 <dg> (5) - Progress
20:05:39 <dg> (6) - Next meeting
20:05:50 <dg> (7) - Any other notes from participants, etc
20:05:50 <dg> bit of a mouthful!
20:06:28 <dg> I'm hoping we have enough people here today
20:06:43 <dg> I'm trying to base things off of past meetings
20:07:11 <dg> so uh..
20:07:26 <dg> First of all, do we have anyone from long enough ago to recap the changes (big ones, notable ons)
20:07:26 <dg> since the last meeting?
20:07:33 <dg> (It was Sept 8)
20:09:05 <nom> unlikely atm... could try a highlight all tho
20:09:24 <asdfsdafsdafsd> Hear ye, Hear ye!
20:09:27 * asdfsdafsdafsd pounds gavel20:09:35 <dg> I'm thinking maybe KillYourTV knows a little
20:09:53 <dg> I was told welt could be here too, so hopefully he can wave at some time
20:09:56 <dg> (no sign of zzz either)
20:10:09 <dg> This will be somewhat awkward without most of the team
20:10:23 <asdfsdafsdafsd> The honorable asdfsdafsdafsd is now presiding
20:10:25 <iRelay> * weltende@freenode waves
20:10:37 <dg> :)
20:10:37 <dg> Okay
20:10:48 <zzz> here
20:10:51 <dg> So, first of all, as some of you may know, this is the first meeting in 2 years
20:11:04 <dg> And even the last meeting was specalized
20:11:08 <dg> specialized*
20:11:30 <dg> I'm planning on booting up regular meetings to catch up on progress, etc, even if there is no big topic to discuss
20:12:01 <dg> wrt "change", I'm contemplating taking up Project Manager
20:12:04 <dg> or at least some sort of co-ordinator
20:12:28 <dg> I'm proud of the progress that was made with dr|z3d although sadly, I don't think he's ready to join in -dev again just yet (speak, even)
20:12:54 <dg> I can't comment on progress from the last 2 years since I haven't been here for that long
20:12:57 <dg> If somebody else could, I'd appreciate it
20:13:04 <dg> <pause for $person>
20:13:18 <nom> might have to wait for netsplit to unsplit
20:13:25 <dg> might be a good idea :-/
20:13:36 <nom> hehe
20:13:51 <LaughingBuddah> While we wait, what happened dr|z3d?
20:13:54 <LaughingBuddah> what happened with*
20:13:57 * nom pokes the intertubes20:14:13 <dg> There we go.
20:14:20 <dg> Let me paste what they missed.
20:15:42 <dg> this is painful haha
20:16:09 <dg> ok, netsplit folk: http://pastethis.i2p/show/2297/
20:16:12 <iRelay> Title: Paste #2297 | LodgeIt! (at pastethis.i2p)
20:16:12 <dg> <+dg> I can't comment on progress from the last 2 years since I haven't been here for that long
20:16:15 <dg> <+dg> If somebody else could, I'd appreciate it
20:16:15 <dg> <+dg> <pause for $person>
20:16:27 <dg> LaughingBuddah: alright
20:16:53 <dg> Basically, after dr|z3d was kicked out for a long period, etc etc, I raised the point that he should be unmuted in -dev as we're all on the same team here, etc
20:17:00 <dg> He doesn't seem to be up to joining us again yet though
20:17:06 <nom> Complication: KillYourTV badger darrob dg gatekeeper iRelay Meeh postman RN_ Shinobiwan slow sponge str4d albat asdfsdafsdafsd Astral2012_1 Biotrophy blitzkrieg christoph cipher__ dr4wd3- eight_ joepie95 k0e kytv|away LaughingBuddah lezz luminosus MTN nom operhiem1 PrivacyHawk psi SanguineRose soundwave thursday tycho usr w8rabbit woox2k Xtothec zzz meeting time people
20:17:14 <LaughingBuddah> Nono, I was wondering why he was kicked out
20:17:21 <dg> I wanted him to have the choice to in any case, even if he didn't *want to right now*
20:17:21 <dg> Oh
20:17:28 <dg> There were disagreements with the team a while back
20:17:35 <SanguineRose> I'm not here, I am invisible
20:17:38 <LaughingBuddah> I see
20:17:38 <dg> It turned into quite a big disagreement after small ones added up
20:17:53 <dg> It's lead to a pissing contest and a division of the community to an extent :-P
20:17:56 <dg> not nice
20:18:03 <LaughingBuddah> Alright. Proceed :)
20:18:06 <nom> ha! you may be invisible but we can hear you :P
20:18:17 <dg> I'll give the $person a few more seconds to appear..
20:18:20 <SanguineRose> lies, you can not read what I am thinking right now!
20:18:27 * dg sits awkwardly20:18:44 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> dg: yeah.. in dr|z3d and !dr|z3d mostly *cough*
20:18:48 <dg> Clearly nobody is wishing to recite history.. heh
20:18:51 * nom lounges awkwardly while reading SanguineRose's mind20:18:57 <dg> Okay
20:19:16 <nom> meh, figure out history later when the historian decides to show up
20:19:23 <dg> so
20:19:23 <dg> (1) - network health
20:19:45 <dg> From what I've seen on the stats, we're doing okay on that front, although since the Russians left (rusleaks disappeared in general), there's been a drop
20:19:52 <dg> Returning to pre-rus levels (hah)
20:20:05 <dg> Hopefully zzz is available to comment on how we're doing on this front..
20:20:29 <nom> imo network health is opaque, but based just on netsplits it could be better...
20:21:06 <zzz> it's shaky but kytv and I last night found the bug introduced in 0.9.2 causing all the trouble
20:21:21 <dg> zab and I have doubts about something so simple causing the issues though
20:21:27 * nom :| at timing20:21:30 <asdfsdafsdafsd> ugh... split
20:21:36 <dg> >.>
20:21:48 <nom> zzz: what was the bug?
20:21:54 <dg> i guess that's the network speaking to us
20:22:13 <zzz> we accidentally cut the capacity of the network in half.
20:22:53 <LaughingBuddah> haha
20:23:04 * dg didn't see much of a difference on the tunnel success rates but you seem a lot more confident about it fixing things20:23:07 <nom> lol rather unfortunate bug
20:23:14 <dg> ^
20:23:21 <dg> I suppose we're doing alright on that front
20:23:44 <zzz> it's a network thing. You can't fix the network by just upgrading yourself.
20:23:50 <KillYourTV> of course one person upgrading to -10 will fix ALL the problems ;)
20:23:59 <dg> I can't comment for (1a) (IRC) because I've obviously been unable to contact badger
20:23:59 <KillYourTV> bah, I was too slow
20:23:59 <dg> KillYourTV: of course, haven't you heard of Java music?
20:24:02 <dg> *magic
20:24:02 <dg> pfft
20:24:13 <dg> (and i've been unable to contact postman, I was too late to get ech too..)
20:24:17 <dg> so that was a mess up on my part
20:24:51 <dg> (1b) then.
20:24:55 <dg> "
20:24:58 <dg> (1b) - Growth (how to make i2p grow more, developments with Russia (how do we get ourselves out there? outreach to big rus-sites?)) "
20:25:01 <nom> - if (style.equals("udp"))
20:25:01 <nom> + if (style.equals("SSU"))
20:25:01 <dg> Pretty broard
20:25:04 *** eight_ is now known as eight20:25:07 <nom> ? that the bug?
20:25:24 <dg> (and there's a variable changed)
20:25:36 <zzz> thatsit
20:25:58 <dg> What was the commit excuse for that, anyway?
20:25:58 <dg> (in 0.9.2)
20:26:59 <k0e> regarding russian users, I think a big question is how is the #i2p-ru channel here doing? Are the russian users getting good support as compared to when english speakers come here and receive help
20:28:13 <LaughingBuddah> Do we have someone familiar with i2p that speaks russian?
20:28:24 <LaughingBuddah> Maybe even a dev?
20:29:02 * nom wanted to learn russian at one point, but never found the time...20:29:21 <KillYourTV> user 'slow' fits there
20:29:32 <k0e> and on a sidenote, german looks to be the 3rd largest country after russia and USA
20:29:35 <str4d> slow hangs out there, right?
20:29:35 * nom thinks we need to go hunting for a russian and english speaking user who is dev inclined20:29:38 <KillYourTV> (and he's nearly always in #ru)
20:29:53 <nom> nvm guess we found one
20:30:22 <LaughingBuddah> GOod
20:31:48 <nom> wrt growth generally, i would say working out all the network stability / performance bugs is a good step
20:32:09 <nom> also more content = more users = more content, sharing is caring and all that
20:32:28 <LaughingBuddah> What he said ^
20:33:02 <dg> #i2p-ru is dead
20:33:02 <dg> zab is able to convert RU->EN but not EN->RU
20:33:16 <dg> btw, #ru has users, #i2p-ru does not
20:33:31 <dg> while working out bugs is great
20:33:42 <dg> We've certainly got a community based issue and I have not the slightest clue how to solve it
20:33:49 <nom> so yah.. everyone upload their media stashes to postman, and run high cap routers
20:34:13 <dg> i wish it was that simple
20:34:27 <dg> I guess this kind of includs IRL meetings
20:34:34 <dg> We've got a bunch of i2p-folk going to CCC this year
20:34:52 <dg> I think an "i2p workshop" is the best way to utilize this since it is too late to book a talk
20:35:02 <nom> lol yah increasing content is never simple, but good to remind people
20:35:18 <k0e> dg: suggest, maybe you can talk to eche|on and postman about combining those two channels (redirect to one of them)
20:35:18 <dg> i2p is barely out there like Tor
20:35:53 <dg> k0e: noted, will look into it later, thanks :)
20:36:16 <nom> re irl community meetings, at conferences and such, yah there needs to be more of it. ideally with the organizers staying connected to those of us back home in i2p, with videos and blogs, etc
20:36:55 <dg> Not sure how we could reach out to the russians, but someone could try speaking to the censored websites
20:36:59 <dg> prominent ones which are controversial, etc
20:37:06 <dg> Sadly, rusleaks is absolutely gone
20:37:09 <dg> So we can't rely on that
20:37:34 <dg> I tried reaching out to the an*on folk but I was unable to get on their networks anonymously so that was a little redundant
20:38:21 <LaughingBuddah> Let's move on
20:38:36 <darrob> i don't know about the reaching out, dg. does tor do that? this going from door to door advertising doesn't seem right.
20:38:43 <dg> Okay.
20:39:04 <dg> darrob: They don't do the door-to-door, and us doing that officially isn't right either. I was going to just encourage them a little.
20:39:22 <dg> LaughingBuddah: sure.
20:39:29 <str4d> Doc improvements would help a lot.
20:39:41 * dg was thinking about that earlier20:39:44 <dg> I wasn't sure on the standards of them
20:40:51 <nom> yah doc improvements, and also some rigorous security testing could go a long way towards user growth
20:41:25 <dg> actually, we missed out on security testing due to lack of recent docs
20:41:35 <dg> of course, we couldn't have done anything since doc improvement took a while but yeah
20:42:09 <dg> Right now, the only way to say i2p is safer than something heavily audited e.g Tor is to read all the code + design yourself
20:42:15 <dg> That's fine for those who are wise in that area but bs for users
20:42:25 <dg> i2p has had little academic research too
20:42:35 <nom> imo at least, most users of this kinda thing want to get into the details of how it works and how secure it is. the threadmodel page is useful, but their not the results of extensive testing
20:42:46 <dg> Of course, you can't exactly force academics to write papers on i2p..
20:42:57 <dg> nom: I agree.
20:43:19 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> dg: that's not really true anymore imho
20:43:38 <dg> hm?
20:43:45 <nom> lol .... i suppose we could try to blackmail some grad students into writing papers on i2p \o/
20:43:55 <dg> $5 wrench
20:44:08 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> ah.. just got an mail of an talk about i2p @ athens cryptoparty #0
20:44:24 <dg> oh, nice. I was wondering about Cryptoparty
20:44:27 <dg> Tor has been heavily featured at them
20:44:41 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> dg: there are a few papers about i2p.. (remember that tum i2p paper for example? ;)
20:44:50 <asdfsdafsdafsd> I doubt many academics will write papers or advocate I2P.... they're all in league with the globalists
20:45:44 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> asdfsdafsdafsd: academics won't promote anything except their own software they are working on atm ;-)
20:45:48 <dg> i2p, not so much
20:46:28 <dg> The only papers I've seen about i2p are the french and correlation with headers/clocks
20:46:48 <dg> moving on
20:46:55 <asdfsdafsdafsd> weltende... exactly
20:47:02 <dg> "(3) - Discussion regarding merging current fux with trunk "
20:47:14 <nom> soooo.... gsoc? seems like security testing would be a good thing for that
20:47:17 <dg> I'm not sure if anyone can give a real answer to this apart from zzz
20:47:35 *** str4d is now known as str4d_afk20:47:46 <dg> for those of you not aware, fux is a branch of i2p dev'd by str4d among others with user interfaces improvements. Theme improvements, that kind of thing.
20:47:49 <dg> nom: nobody wants to do gsoc
20:47:56 *** str4d_afk is now known as str4d20:48:13 <dg> nom: zzz is on trac as a mentor but he apparently doesn't want to have a student
20:48:24 <zzz> sorry dg, all I know is 2-3 months old. last I heard, they were forking?
20:48:27 <dg> (not sure if correct, that's what I was told)
20:48:43 <zzz> wrong
20:48:58 <nom> no kidding, probably why it hasn't got done, but its a resource that gives access to the kind of people that could actually do a security assessment
20:49:24 <dg> zzz: There was some discussion of a fork, it's kind of died down now as some people have had a change of heart. Not sure what's going to be going on there, I don't think anyone is. Regarding the current changes though, I feel they could be somewhat beneficial. Nothing massive/feature breaking in there, however.
20:49:34 <dg> zzz: also, wrong?
20:49:38 <str4d> I am happy to mentor for GSoC
20:50:09 <dg> nom: Yup.
20:50:21 <dg> str4d: We could apply for next year, the application for 2010(?) is still up on trac.
20:50:25 <zzz> re: gsoc: wrong as in I'm happy to help but I'm not going to be in charge and not going to do it myself.
20:50:43 <dg> totally different to what i heard
20:50:53 <dg> key word: heard, I suppose
20:51:05 <dg> relevant trac page: http://trac.i2p2.i2p/wiki/gsoc
20:51:32 <zzz> dg re: fux, you're asking the wrong guy. I have no recent info.
20:51:39 <nom> imo fork is both exactly what is happening and exactly what is not happening, zzz you 'control' the official i2p.i2p branch in that you give out commit keys, but theres always gonna be people/groups writing their own features/code into i2p, if theres no interest in merging it stays a 'fork' but otherwise its not really
20:52:01 <dg> zzz: generally asking if you'd be ok with merging some of the themes, etc
20:52:04 <str4d> AFAIK there is nothing stopping mentors being anon, but we need a contactable liason (not sure if they must be non-anon) and some tax form as an organization.
20:52:23 <dg> Right.
20:52:37 <dg> I'm fine with being a liason but I'm sure a few people would be.
20:52:56 <dg> Tax form .. ugh
20:53:05 <LaughingBuddah> We will need some people to agree to be the face of i2p
20:53:24 <str4d> IIRC there was a USA-based one, or a Foreign-based one.
20:53:31 <dg> sadly we can't avoid that, LaughingBuddah..
20:53:59 <dg> I don't want to be the guy trying to force people to give up anonymity and get up on stages but
20:54:18 <dg> We do need someone who wants to and can fulfill the job
20:54:41 <zzz> dg the last I looked at it was months ago. It was a big grab bag of stuff and I had some objections. Nobody has since asked me to look again - or spilt out the bad from the good - or given me any updates - or mentioned any progress about addressing my issues.. Unless that happens I have no update for you and i assume they are either working on it or forking.
20:54:49 <str4d> (Might not have been tax, but it was something financial)
20:54:52 <str4d> Not sure what was done in 2010 for that.
20:55:19 <dg> zzz: Alright, if I can get them to talk about it etc, I may be able to get you an update.
20:55:27 <dg> just a note
20:55:30 <dg> http://trac.i2p2.i2p/wiki/gsoc/ideas
20:55:37 <dg> seems quite interesting
20:55:40 <iRelay> Title: gsoc/ideas – I2P (at trac.i2p2.i2p)
20:55:44 <zzz> so I repeat, you are asking the wrong guy. If you want to know about status, ask the guys working on it, not me.
20:56:07 <dg> I was asking if you'd be okay with merging is all, if they co-operated.
20:56:19 <dg> I felt that the changes could benefit i2p somewhat.
20:56:34 <dg> welcome psi
20:56:41 <psi> ??
20:56:48 <dg> dev meeting
20:56:55 <psi> ok
20:57:36 <dg> The application for GSOC seems solid
20:57:39 <dg> Could possibly reuse it
20:57:39 <nom> zzz: what were the issues you needed addressed?
20:59:54 <str4d> There was an image in a dark theme that has since been replaced. Were there any other major issues?
21:00:17 <psi> ah yes... the assange character should've been removed for now
21:00:20 <psi> s/for/by
21:00:35 <dg> What's wrong with Assange? :P
21:00:46 <zzz> the main thing in remember is regressions in legibility and color choices, esp. in snark. But it's been months since I looked at it
21:00:49 <darrob> nom: you should try to find logs. it would be hard to recall or summarize. (for me, anyway, and i tried to give feedback, too).
21:00:56 <zzz> I felt it was a big step backwards
21:01:18 <KillYourTV> http://killyourtv.i2p/irclogs/%23i2p-dev.2012-08-23.log.html
21:01:21 <iRelay> Title: #i2p-dev logs for Thursday, 2012-08-23 (at killyourtv.i2p)
21:01:32 <dg> seems too late to enter gsoc this time now
21:01:43 <psi> regardless... i think we need a "real life" UI testing mechanism that isn't totally subjective
21:01:47 <dg> or uh, next year's are not open (what i mean)
21:01:54 <dg> psi: exactly
21:01:57 <psi> this is where users like Zorya come into play
21:02:12 <psi> Zorya especially is the perfect feedback tool for UI stuff
21:02:35 <nom> re assange, imo hes a cool dude, but as he 'officially' has nothing to do with i2p, we shouldn't be using his image on stuff... unless its like something related to him or wikileaks...
21:02:38 <psi> "regular" or "casual" users are VERY important and should be utilized for feedback
21:02:41 <zzz> but if the fux guys dont remember my objections either, then they probably haven't addressed them, and we're in the same place we were 3 months ago.
21:02:51 <psi> nom: i2p is politically neutral
21:03:37 <str4d> zzz, I recall your legibility issues, and I still think that is more a personal preference matter (since there are clear examples of people both liking and disliking the changes)
21:03:49 <nom> psi: right... if such a thing is possible
21:03:52 <psi> nom: no need to take any stance on things that are politically sensitive anywhere
21:03:59 <str4d> and color*
21:04:02 <str4d> The major issue was the image, and that has been addressed.
21:04:13 <nom> pretty sure were taking a stand about anonymity and free exchange of data tho....
21:04:35 <str4d> psi, what's Zorya?
21:04:42 <asdfsdafsdafsd> assange is cointelpro
21:04:53 <dg> a person, not sure who/what they do though
21:04:53 <KillYourTV> I can say that when I last looked a few weeks ago, the constrasts in snark weren't nearly as jarring as they had been.
21:04:53 <psi> str4d: Zorya is a user in this channel
21:05:15 <psi> str4d: a "regular" user in jester's group
21:05:15 <zzz> so none of my issues were addressed? (except perhaps the assange image)
21:05:19 <zzz> then we're in the same place
21:05:38 <dg> actually, iirc, the colors were improved
21:05:42 <dg> i'm not sure they are perfect however
21:05:56 <zzz> at the time, I thought that fux was unmergable, that you should kill it and start over, separating out the good from the bad and the ugly.
21:06:08 <psi> zzz: tbh i'm not entirely sure that style issues are that critical unless they impact usability
21:06:36 <str4d> psi, ah - I read your sentence as Zorya being an automated testing tool =P
21:06:39 <dg> the best bit about fux, for me, was the framing of apps inside the console
21:06:46 <dg> i don't care as much about themes
21:07:01 <darrob> psi: that argument works for and against changes. ;)
21:07:20 <psi> darrob: correct
21:07:23 <nom> imo themes are themes and should be a basket of everyones options, if your problem is the default theme... then yah i guess i can see you not wanting to merge that... but still
21:07:23 <zzz> I gave my comments 3 months ago and havent heard anything since. If somebody would like to identify changes and ask me to look at it again, fine.
21:07:38 <dg> nom: my thoughts.
21:07:49 <zzz> you people that are saying you like some of it and dont care about the rest are missing the point completely.
21:07:49 <psi> darrob: however in its current state, the router console is in need of a redesign as it fails as a UI
21:07:52 <user> an improvement from the ui guys's side would be a UI plugin, I think.
21:08:04 <zzz> split out the good from the bad. right now it's a grab bag
21:08:11 <user> <dg> the best bit about fux, for me, was the framing of apps inside the console <<<---- that one I liked too.. gave an impression of unity
21:08:26 <dg> Made things a lot less clunky IMO, user.
21:08:56 <str4d> zzz, the point here is that there is nothing bad/ugly in fux, there is just stuff that everyone likes and stuff that some like and some don't.
21:09:07 <zzz> sounds like you guys are saying you still want to merge it but haven't done anything in 3 months?
21:09:33 <zzz> disagree. your snark changes are objectively bad/ugly.
21:09:56 <user> what's it that everyone likes? maybe one could start identifying that and only merge that
21:09:59 <psi> zzz: much has been done but that doesn't mean anything is "complete", as for something being "objectively ugly" is kind of an oxymoron
21:10:02 <nom> right well the good, the bad, and the ugly, are subjective.... imo as long its configurable personal taste of devs shouldn't come into it
21:10:24 <dg> Yes, we have?
21:10:27 <dg> In fact, I believe the color issue was also addressed.
21:10:27 <dg> see nom's comment
21:10:27 <dg> <nom> imo themes are themes and should be a basket of everyones options, if your problem is the default theme... then yah i guess i can see you not wanting to merge that... but still
21:10:27 <dg> psi: Exactly.
21:10:27 <dg> psi: It's great for nerds like us, not so much for a grandma who wants to be safe.
21:10:34 <dg> zzz: I can somewhat agree for snark but the rest, no.
21:10:45 <dg> user: the unification.
21:10:48 <dg> user: the non-default themes, too.
21:10:59 <dg> user: if it's non-default, I think it's fine to merge and improve along the way. Doesn't hurt.
21:11:06 <nom> how bout this, default keeps theme the same, but includes all the things fux adds, to use them you just set something in config?
21:11:14 <dg> ^
21:11:29 <zzz> If the people doing the work say they think it's ready for another look, I'll take a look. I have nothing more to say.
21:11:32 <psi> currently (afaik), fux is aimed at hackability and flexibility, not explicitly general pleaseability
21:11:43 <dg> alright
21:11:46 <str4d> Given the users that have said otherwise, I find that hard to take as truly objective.
21:11:46 <dg> fair enough, zzz.
21:11:46 <str4d> Nevertheless, I do agree that fux is not ready for merging dg
21:12:09 <psi> str4d: fux is no where near merging
21:12:09 <dg> str4d: all I wanted was some discussion on it to see what needed doing :)
21:12:12 <psi> not sure who suggested a merge
21:12:15 <maidenboi> i like the snark changes
21:12:26 <nom> zzz: can you agree to that principle tho? that its mergeable if you're experience/view isn't changed unless you select it to happen? ie no default changes
21:13:44 <nom> or rather, since as you said its a grab bag, that pieces are mergeable if they don't change default things and only add options
21:14:14 <psi> at the moment fux is more of a sandbox for ideas, not really meant to be merged over to mainline in its entirety
21:14:45 <psi> i don't expect fux to ever be fully merged over nor would it be a good idea
21:14:56 <dg> I wanted some parts merged
21:15:18 <psi> dg: if they are "done" then sure
21:15:25 <psi> dg: which ones?
21:15:29 <LaughingBuddah> How to we determine them to be done?
21:15:48 <str4d> dg, I agree about the changes to non-default themes being mergable, especially since the majority of changes are by the original theme author, but there are other things that need work first.
21:15:55 <user> again, plugins would be handy, as to not increase the i2p package's size unneededly.
21:16:30 <KillYourTV> One thing for sure would be the pull the fix for ticket #773. It's fine in fux; it's not fine in the vanilla builds.
21:16:37 <iRelay> http://trac.i2p2.i2p/ticket/773 - (new defect) - Overlapping text in midnight theme
21:16:49 <psi> i do like the unified css and inline frames for snark and mail
21:16:49 <psi> especially the unified css
21:16:52 <KillYourTV> iirc LaughingBuddah reported that in this channel as well.
21:16:59 <str4d> user, that does require getting the UI separation done though (which I hope to work on with top[tabfail] when I get some time)
21:17:22 <dg> psi: mainly the embedding of things, like snark
21:17:25 <dg> LaughingBuddah: majority satisfaction
21:17:28 <psi> dg: yes i like that too
21:17:46 <str4d> dg, #define majority =P
21:17:49 <darrob> i'm confused. i was under the impression that fux was supposed to be merged (rather sooner than later even). i wouldn't have taken the time and given detailed criticism if i was told that it was just a sandbox.
21:18:00 <LaughingBuddah> KillYourTV: Yeah I remember doing that
21:18:11 <psi> darrob: my impression was that it is a sandbox
21:18:36 <psi> as i have been treating it as such so far
21:18:46 <str4d> darrob, I always intended it to be merged. But in some ways it is meant as a UI sandbox.
21:18:53 <dg> str4d: i'd like the creator of the functionality to think it's ok to merge (time to), and a lot of the fux/users with it liking it
21:19:00 <dg> darrob: so was I?
21:19:00 <dg> Anyway,
21:19:07 <dg> I think we can agree that fux needs work
21:19:22 <dg> unification + #773 fix should get merged sooner rather than later
21:19:40 <dg> Let's move on ;-)
21:19:43 <str4d> It's Future UX, so it's for testing and trying out new UX ideas, working out the kinks and polishing.
21:19:58 <str4d> +1 dg
21:20:09 <psi> str4d: that would be sandbox... moving on
21:20:37 <nom> honestly i think we need to have better communication here, theres always going to be things that are mergable, and we need people who can discuss that merging without getting into fights ;)
21:21:03 <nom> so far so win today, which is nice
21:21:06 <str4d> I also need to work out how to best merge parts of branches in monotone.
21:21:43 <KillYourTV> and yeah, it looks like assange (and the dark snark theme) are completely gone
21:21:54 <str4d> At present I only know about "propagate" and "explicit_merge", but they merge everything up to a specific commit, rather than cherry-picking changes.
21:22:24 <nom> str4d: probably something involving editing a diff down to just the parts you want
21:22:24 <str4d> KillYourTV, dark snark is not in mtn, but it's in my fux builds.
21:22:51 <KillYourTV> ah..so assange (run through a filter) may still live...
21:23:02 <dg> as for fux's issues, we can co-ordinate on that after the meeting
21:23:05 <dg> we're doing well so far though
21:23:05 * dg highfives21:23:05 <dg> (4) - Website
21:23:09 <dg> (4a) - Mirroring i2p2.de/etc
21:23:09 <dg> (4b) - SSL for the sites.
21:23:09 <dg> We need welt for this..
21:23:09 <dg> Tor's mirroring setup is great right now, rsync etc.
21:23:09 <dg> Plus a clear list of mirrors and how to do it
21:23:09 <dg> nom: Yeah.
21:23:09 <dg> nom: We did well now, just that we have other issues to discuss so.. ha
21:23:31 * dg coughs21:24:21 <nom> right, re website.... same as before re docs i guess, theres good info, but it feels like it hasn't been touched in a while
21:24:36 <dg> precisely my feelings
21:24:39 <dg> it seems very out of time
21:24:49 <str4d> KillYourTV, no - did you not read my earlier message?
21:25:03 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> dg: rsync master thingy is already running
21:25:46 <str4d> nom, that seems a bit hacky... I'd prefer a solution that still allowed for a "propagate" at a later stage once the other branch was exactly as wanted.
21:25:46 <dg> I've noticed some issues between how things really are and what the website says
21:26:24 <psi> in general the website seems to feel old and the "revamp" last i checked looks really good
21:26:28 <nom> str4d: yah... could separate each mergeable thing into its own branch and merge that i suppose, and keep fux as a sandbox/catch all
21:26:52 <dg> weltende: not documented anywhere, iirc
21:26:59 <dg> psi: we should speed up on the revamp
21:27:05 <dg> the current one feels extremely stale
21:27:12 <psi> dg: priorities
21:27:23 <nom> like use fux as a test branch, when something is ready to be included as its own component, separate the branch and merge it there, also so you can maintain it as its own thing
21:27:32 <psi> dg: what has more importance? website or the software?
21:27:43 <str4d> There does need to be improvement of the website content. I've been working on layout and structure in i2p.www.revamp but haven't touched the content (otherwise propagations would be a nightmare), so that needs working on in i2p.www
21:27:46 * str4d is still not happy with the design of the revamp, but that is not the focus right now - proper content structuring so that (a) new content can be easily added, and (b) users can find what they want easily, is the main focus21:28:15 <thursday> Could we set up a blog on the official site? I'd gladly chip write a post a week or so - short tutorials and tips, development updates, etc.
21:28:18 <str4d> psi, that is a chicken-and-egg question. Both are important.
21:28:21 <dg> psi: Hell, I think the website is a big deal and it affects the software.
21:28:24 <dg> thursday: me too.
21:28:59 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> thursday: already kinda done in the revamp branch.. not feature complete.. but the basic stuff is there
21:29:42 <dg> str4d: +1
21:29:42 <nom> ....big picture software is more important, but the website needs improvement, and imo theres enough people with enough time and skills to work on the website, without it impacting how much 'code' gets done
21:29:42 * psi refreshes the revamp branch21:29:42 <str4d> thursday, at present the main site is just a collection of HTML files. The revamp reorganizes things so that there is a specific blog.
21:29:42 <str4d> (Still a collection of HTML files, but blog generation etc. is dynamic so it makes maintaining a blog much simpler)
21:29:42 <nom> software = community = website, as its the first introduction most people get
21:29:49 <dg> current site makes me think nerdy
21:30:11 <dg> and dead, old
21:30:18 <dg> I didn't know if i2p was even in active dev when I first saw it
21:30:37 <str4d> thursday, (and those who haven't seen it): http://vekw35szhzysfq7cwsly37coegsnb4rrsggy5k4wtasa6c34gy5a.b32.i2p/en/site/ is the revamp
21:31:01 <LaughingBuddah> psi: they could be worked on my different people. no need to decide for only one of the two
21:31:16 <dg> I can do blog posts/write ups for pages.
21:32:51 <KillYourTV> yes, I read your message str4d. and I call http://killyourtv.i2p/tmp/nffnatr.png "assange run through a filter"
21:33:17 <KillYourTV> (hell, back in early september it was still 'assange.png' :P)
21:34:13 <thursday> That looks fantastic. As someone who wants to help out with the site, is there a list of the major things that need to be done before this revamp can go live?
21:34:24 <str4d> KillYourTV, that is not current. If you run fux you'll see that replaced with a variant of hat guy.
21:34:47 <KillYourTV> I *just* downloaded that from you.
21:35:18 <str4d> KillYourTV, oh, then the image file might still be sitting there. But snark does not use it.
21:35:45 * str4d has often forgotten to remove random files, sometimes leaving .zip files in the update packages >_<21:36:11 <KillYourTV> alright...NOW I can agree. It's not in the css. carry on :) (and sorry)
21:36:32 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> hmm.. that News thingy at the end of the page is a bit to hidden imho
21:36:52 <dg> thursday: +1, I'd like this too. We can wrap up on this if we have that and can decide on a few people to work on that.
21:36:55 <str4d> thursday, feedback is key. I'm still working out the structure and layout at present, so comments on that are welcome (url layout as well as navigation)
21:36:59 <dg> <+dg> thursday: +1, I'd like this too. We can wrap up on this if we have that and can decide on a few people to work on that.
21:38:11 <str4d> thursday, if you want to improve content, there are many pages that could do with reworking to make it easier for end users to find/understand what they need to.
21:38:33 * str4d can go through some of that later if desired.21:38:51 <dg> That'd be nice
21:39:57 <LaughingBuddah> Timed out...What's the topic?
21:40:40 <dg> Not much was said about mirroring, I think that includes the re-design though
21:40:40 <dg> imo, any changes to the current design are just temporary and not worth thinking too much about
21:42:10 <LaughingBuddah> Link to logs please
21:42:10 <LaughingBuddah> I'd like to read the part about mirroring/offer my services
21:42:10 <str4d> welterde, you were making changes to the mirroring scripts IIRC?
21:42:10 <dg> weltende: SSL on the sites, legit certs, SSL on the mirrors (at least some) - how possible is this?
21:42:10 <dg> unprofessional to have expired/none/CACert (which throws up errors = scary)
21:42:10 <dg> you could argue CA system is weak but better than nothing
21:42:10 <dg> LaughingBuddah: website etc
21:42:10 <dg> LaughingBuddah: very little was said wrt mirroring
21:42:10 <LaughingBuddah> I'd like to set up a mirror
21:42:19 <str4d> dg, yeah, there are long-standing issues in trac related to that.
21:42:19 <dg> LaughingBuddah: I figure it was because the current site is dire and we might as well wait for the new design before we do anything big.
21:42:19 <dg> The new site can highlight important things as well as a surge of new information.
21:42:22 <LaughingBuddah> Fair enough
21:42:22 <dg> Anything for the old site, again, IMO is just trying to keep something dead afloat.
21:42:34 <dg> Thank you though! :-)
21:42:34 <LaughingBuddah> Offer still stands
21:42:43 <dg> Oh, by the way, syndie.i2p2.i2p doesn't exist, but syndie.i2p2.de does
21:42:46 <dg> inconsistency..
21:42:55 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> str4d: uh..
21:43:07 <dg> (Regarding Syndie, it'd be cool if someone could try poke it back alive, but we probably do not have the men)
21:43:16 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> str4d: you mean for the revamp thing or what do you mean?
21:43:20 <nom> yah, wrt syndie that really should be removed from the frontpage... unless someone has taking it back up without me noticing, its been dead for years
21:43:31 <dg> Syndie is a really cool idea.
21:43:49 <str4d> welterde, IIRC you said you were reworking the mirroring scripts, and that they would be shifted out of i2p.www eventually
21:43:55 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> str4d: I was gonna integrate that into the main site, so the mirror sites don't depend on my site anymore
21:44:14 <str4d> dg, one thing I hope to fix on the new site is that urls we know exist in i2p and in clearnet get auto-changed based on the user's location (rather than an i2p user having links to trac.i2p2.de for example).
21:44:32 <str4d> welterde, ah, okay.
21:45:03 <dg> str4d: oh, yes. I was thinking about that a while ago. That'd be a small but very good change for UX.
21:45:03 <dg> good call
21:45:03 <LaughingBuddah> We've got all these projects that need manpower. Maybe we start assigning people to make sure they move forward?
21:45:42 <str4d> dg, small from UX standpoint. %^&*ing annoying from backend standpoint >_<
21:45:53 * str4d has tried and so far failed21:46:03 <dg> ^ this
21:47:13 <hottuna> are the projects organized / listed anywhere?
21:47:32 <psi> hottuna: iirc projects.i2p is one place
21:47:35 <psi> not sure
21:47:39 <dg> Perhaps we should create tickets in trac and assign them?
21:47:42 <dg> This would mean a clear, documented timeline of progress on work and to follow up who is working on it..
21:47:45 <dg> str4d: sounds quite easy? :s. just s/$domain/$currentdomain/..
21:47:45 <dg> str4d: Also, could do in JavaScript although not ideal.
21:47:45 <dg> hottuna: we're discussing them / and there's a topic on zzz.i2p to an extent about it but we're kind of trying to fix that
21:47:48 <dg> I propose we have trac tickets for each of the issues we've raised here, but if we can't use trac (we should though, imo since it's official)
21:47:55 <dg> we can use projects.i2p
21:48:10 <dg> trac also allows parent tickets and such, so we could have a complete way of planning this
21:48:13 <LaughingBuddah> What's the status on trac ---> redmine?
21:48:21 <psi> LaughingBuddah: probably not needed atm
21:48:32 <dg> LaughingBuddah: awaiting weltende.. but not needed right now
21:48:35 <LaughingBuddah> I see
21:48:41 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> haven't had time yet to give it a try yet
21:48:41 <dg> the issues with trac are more so on welt's end, not trac
21:48:44 <dg> software.
21:49:00 <dg> psi: Can you get to creating tickets for some of the issues we've raised today?
21:50:40 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> dg: actually it's just the monotone plugin as I said before.. other downtimes weren't *that* often to be really annoying imho..
21:50:46 <nom> also re trac / redmine, if anyone has any experience with fossil, i would love to hear about it, im mulling over the possibility of trying to use it to make a system for actually distributed repos/bug tracking
21:50:48 <psi> dg: which and where?
21:50:57 <dg> psi: Trac, website reorganization, managing the necessary fux changes, dealing with the mirroring stuff, etc. Just general parent ones which we can assign to people so they do not forget and it's clear who we can grill if something breaks/doesn't work.
21:50:57 <darrob> hasn't this "assigning jobs to people will ensure that they'll get done real quick" meme been discussed on zzz.i2p already?
21:51:04 <dg> darrob: maybe, but was it even done?
21:51:11 <dg> (or work?)
21:51:30 <dg> We've clearly got some people who can get some tasks done
21:51:33 <psi> dg: i dont get things done "fast"
21:51:33 <dg> trac is a way of documenting proress
21:51:33 <psi> dg: for me they are eventual
21:51:33 <dg> psi: neither do i, but i do get them done
21:52:47 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> nom: people used to run a fossil thingy.. but afair you got into trouble if two people edited the wiki at once(in two different instances that is..)
21:53:44 <nom> speaking of eventual, psi: i/others could get a lot out of you writing up your thoughts on netdb structure / your baromatrix experiences so far.. like a running blog or something
21:53:59 <dg> nom: i certainly would
21:54:14 <dg> psi: if not you, I can/someone else. I'd just like something to come out of this meeting so we can follow up on it next time. :)
21:54:14 <nom> weltende: hmm interesting... so there would have to be some sort of system for consistency
21:54:55 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> nom: or simply support for merging as it does for files
21:56:08 <psi> nom: current "status" of baromatrix is "being worked on"
21:56:08 <psi> nom: i have more than just i2p right now going on
21:56:15 <nom> psi: right, i understand, don't mean to pressure you or your time, just saying its always good to share your thoughts
21:56:46 <psi> i'll share thoughts when they happen nom
21:56:49 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> baromatrix?
21:56:57 <nom> weltende: indeed, guess i'l have to experiment with it a bit
21:57:00 <dg> statistics project
21:57:10 <psi> baromatrix is a distributed version of stats.i2p
21:57:15 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> ah
21:57:15 <psi> to "double check" the numbers
21:57:30 <psi> it's something that i've been meaning to do for a while
21:57:59 <psi> also to get a general demographic of the userbase too without being invasive
21:58:58 <nom> also uh... wheres the code? the git.repo seems to be .... nothing?
22:03:28 <dg> I guess we should wrap up then
22:03:35 <dg> Thanks for being involved, everyone. hopefully this can become a regular thing.
22:03:46 <dg> Anyone got any more to say/issues to raise?
22:04:07 <LaughingBuddah> Maybe we should schedule the next one?
22:04:26 <dg> Next Tuesday at 9PM UTC?
22:04:29 <dg> 8PM seemed a little rough for some people.
22:04:45 <hottuna> bampf?
22:04:56 * dg bampfs the meeting closed ;-)22:05:30 <hottuna> thanks dg, this seems like a good thing
22:06:00 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> dg: for me 7PM would be better..
22:06:10 <dg> hottuna: Thank you, I've had a lot of support, it was a little rough at the start of this and I felt anxious about how it'd go, but it went well. Perhaps we could see more of you/others next time too!
22:06:17 <dg> weltende: 7PM UTC is ok for me, I think.
22:06:28 <dg> weltende: 8PM caused issues for str4d
22:06:43 <dg> Next Tuesday @ 7:30PM?
22:09:40 <iRelay> <weltende@freenode> sounds good
22:10:28 <LaughingBuddah> +1
22:10:39 <dg> Great.
22:14:59 <LaughingBuddah> Cya all
22:15:02 <LaughingBuddah> dg: good meeting